Andreas Plesner
20 posts

Andreas Plesner
@andreas_plesner
Research Intern at @joinhandshake and PhD student at @ETH_en. Interested in how to build and design intelligent systems


After 3 hours, OpenAI finally managed to solve D - one of the two very hard tasks. There are still 4 hours left till the end of the contest. AI is clearly no longer in a spot, where it either quickly gets a correct solution or is completely helpless.



since a good bunch of discourse is going on around "how to do research", these pieces are quite worth a read. joschu.net/blog/opinionat… michaelnielsen.org/blog/principle… karpathy.github.io/2016/09/07/phd/ alignmentforum.org/posts/Ldrss6o3…

Fable 5 is state-of-the-art on nearly all tested benchmarks, with exceptional performance in software engineering, knowledge work, scientific research, and vision. The longer and more complex the task, the larger Fable 5’s lead over our other models.


We built Agent Judge to evaluate long-horizon agents. As agents take on longer tasks, the evidence needed to evaluate them gets buried across tool calls, retries, logs, database updates, and final outputs. Evaluating these agents requires investigating the trajectory, not just judging the final answer.

Introducing MiniMax M3: The First Open-Weights Model to Combine Three Frontier Capabilities - Coding & Agentic Frontier: 59.0% SWE-Bench Pro, 66.0% Terminal Bench 2.1, 34.8% SWE-fficiency, 28.8% KernelBench Hard, 74.2% MCP Atlas - MiniMax Sparse Attention scales context to 1M - Natively Multimodal from Step Zero API: platform.minimax.io Token Plan: platform.minimax.io/subscribe/toke… 🚀New! MiniMax Code: code.minimax.io Weights & Tech Report in ~10 Days



Today we’re releasing DeepSWE, a new standard for agentic coding benchmarks. On public leaderboards, top models often look relatively close in capability. DeepSWE shows where they actually diverge, reflecting the realistic experience of developers in their day-to-day work.


Grading agent rollouts in rubric-graded RL environments is itself a hard task. Prior approaches pass serialized artifacts or agent trajectories to an LLM judge; this loses information / doesn't support sophisticated criteria. In contrast, we built a reactive agentic judge.


Does an imperfect verifier break reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR)? Turns out it doesn’t! Why does this matter? As the world moves into reinforcement learning in semi-verifiable domains, perfect verifiers don’t exist. We added controlled and LLM-based noise to RLVR reward signals and found that up to 30% noise barely hurts training; performance stays within 4pp of the clean baseline. This research has already impacted how we build reinforcement learning environments at @joinHandshake. For a major benchmark we are launching tomorrow, we hill-climbed the verifier to 88% accuracy—above the 85% human inter-rater agreement—knowing from this research that this is good enough. With @andreas_plesner @guzmanhe
